About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)
the car is gregg bergersen. he's a civilian analyst at the pentagon with one of the nation's highest security clearances. his companion is tai shen kuo, a spy for the people's republic of china. bergersen knew a secret that the chinese desperately wanted to know, and neither man knows that what they're about to do is being recorded by two cameras the fbi has concealed in their car. >> let you have the money. >> oh, oh. are you sure that that's okay? >> yeah, it's fine. >> welcome to 60 minutes on cnbc. i'm bob simon. in this edition, we turn our attention to some foreign intrigue. first, a story about a mysterious computer virus that struck an iranian nuclear plant. later, the report of how american agents hunted a notorious arms dealer. and finally, an account of a chinese-american spy trying to steal u.s. military secrets for china. we begin with the story of stuxnet, a computer virus considered to be the world's first destructive cyberweapon. it was launched several years ago against an iranian nuclear facility, almost certainly with some u.s. involvement. but as steve kroft repor
as the internet. in less than a decade, the pentagon's warning that it might be possible for a computer hacker to disable critical infrastructure in a major city and disrupt essential services has actually happened. other online attacks have seen millions of dollars stolen from banks and defense systems infiltrated. it's why, as we first reported in november of 2009, some people are already saying that the next big war is less likely to begin with a bang than a blackout. >> can you imagine your life without electric power? >> until february 2009, retired admiral mike mcconnell was the nation's top spy. as chief of national intelligence, he oversaw the central intelligence agency, the defense intelligence agency and the national security agency. few people know as much about cyber warfare, and our dependency on the power grid, and the computer networks that deliver our oil and gas, pump and purify our water, keep track of our money, and operate our transportation systems. >> if i were an attacker and i wanted to do strategic damage to the united states, i would either take the cold of winter or
the pentagon. and really ambiguity on israel, too. is that possible that's why he was picked? >> well, actually, i think even more revealing when he said it doesn't matter what i think, i'm not in a policy role. in other words, obama has chosen a stooge who has no independent thoughts, who is not going to be in the way, who is simply going to be there as a plug so that he can continue to slash the pentagon budget. this was a five-car pile-up, larry. this was a fiasco, a debacle, whatever you want to call it. what happened in the hearing today is this shifted from an issue of ideology to an issue of competence. would we be willing to trust this man if he went in to go talk to the russians, if he went in to the middle east. i don't think anyone in good conscience looking at him can say he's prepared, he's sober, he has a grasp of these issues. it was an embarrassing performance. the worst in my lifetime, larry, and i'm not alone. a lot of mainstream reporters saying this was really bad. >> aw shucks, jennifer, i can think of many in your lifetime. >> oh, not as bad as this. >> i want to ask you o
. republicans want to move away from these pentagon cuts and put pressure on the president to come up with new cuts. karl rove recommended that today in the "wall street journal." >> pentagon is 20% of our federal budget. if you're going to make cuts in spending that's not entitlements you have to -- >> ding, ding, ding, that's not entitlements. can we make entitlement cuts? >> sequestration doesn't deal with it. >> the president will never do entitlement cuts. >> here's the reality. we saw the gdp growth numbers decline in the last quarter of 2012 because of the contraction in federal government spending. >> that's primarily in the military. >> the private-sector economy has grown 5%. they weathered these cuts. >> ed rogers i want to go back to one fundamental point regarding my sermon on the mound. i really believe that any time you can cut spending and limit government that is good for the economy. that is why fundamentally apart from the numbers and getting in the weed for all these debates i think that this is a pro growth move and that's the reason why i want the republicans to hang toug
care benefit system in the pentagon needs to be overhauled and that these are where major savings are and that's where we should aim for, that the pentagon cannot be immune from this exercise. >> i wouldn't disagree at all. i think you can debate what kind of military defense strategy you wish, what kind of forces you plan on having, their technology, their training levels, all that should be on the table. but you've got to do it in a rational way. you've got to act like it's a business. the whole notion of cutting billions of dollars out of the defense budget, i just read one of the pundits announcing you can cut the defense budget by 2/3 and it wouldn't affect national security. and that all of this is political theater. it's anything but political theater. you know, dr. ash carter, the deputy's a very rational, bright fellow. very experienced. the chiefs of the services just testified under oath. they said this is going to be a big problem. and i think it is. >> and i agree with the general. because again, as i said, i'm not saying not to do cuts but let's do it smart. let's no
recently well. today we do have news from lockheed martin, the pentagon's biggest contractor suggesting that actually sales this year will drop by more if the automatic spending cuts kick in and future years will also be materially affected. what is your view on the sector? >> well, right now, there's just a lot of fear but there has been for some time. so there might be a certain degree of recovery, realizing that it is bad but not the apocolypse that some people have painted it as and there is a good chance that some damage might be undone in that interim period. so while we don't like living in uncertainty and while there will be paying under almost any scenario, it certainly doesn't mean the end. there are definitely positives for this industry in the sector. >> which is the greatest threats. automatic spending can cuts or the fact that you have a president who is in his second term and therefore perhaps more able to cut spending programs that might hit particular cities or regions and a new defense secretary. >> you know, it is interesting. of course a lot of that is simply by even
to see you. i wanted to put this up. this is what's on the cover of "usa today." pentagon warns of huge cuts. when you think about what's going on in washington, right now, and you think about the sequester that may or may not happen, and you think about your history in washington, do you think that we will have the sequester? >> andrew, i don't know. i think it's a very complicated situation. i think we had a great opportunity and i actually thought there was some reasonable chance it might happen, which was to have a grand bargain that could have addressed what is really unsustainable and deeply dangerous long-term fiscal situation and i think if we had done that, not only would be useful for the long run but i think could have generated confidence in the shorter run and promote jobs now. now instead of that we have a happen has 5rd process. a sequester we're facing. it's a terrible piece of legislation. it arbitrarily cuts defense and nondefense without thoughtfully doing so. instead of being phased in so we'd have more room for recovery, it hits abruptly. and it's far, far from clea
's not going to be any opportunity to cut pentagon spending in any serious way if you don't go over the cliff. so there is some stuff in there that i as a democrat don't like. but i think everybody's going to put something in the pot in order to balance the deficit. we did a lousy job in january on the tax side and i hope that -- i think it's better to go over the cliff than do a lousy job -- >> how many people do you know on your side of the field who actually agree with you? >> very few. look they're politicians. they want to spend as much money as they possibly can and they don't want to pay for it. >> who agrees with you? >> oh, i don't know. i bet -- oh, god, joe agrees with me. >> you forgot. the other thing, howard, and i'm just alluding to it, there will be no return to the bush era tax rates on anyone under $400,000? >> right. >> okay. so take that amount of money, whatever that is per year. how much do you need -- how many loopholes do you need to close? what is the marginal rate have to be on people above 400 to replace that potential revenue? it's 100%, isn't it? >> but i don't --
taking the civilian workers when our country is still at war at the pentagon and putting them on four days a week work is still waste. let those who think they've identified waste and no doubt there are efficiencies that can be found put their proposals forward and let those proposals be weighed in the context of a balanced approach. the question isn't whether we should leave any category immune. the question is whether we should have a balanced approach. and to assume, before anyone has laid out any kind of vision of how that $85 billion a year could be cut, that it must be possible and that everything else has to be ruled out seems to me to be a extraordinarily irresponsible approach. of course there are instances of waste in the federal government. there are also instances of huge unmet needs of diseases where we could find cures that save tens of thousands of people's lives in the next several years. but we're cutting the budget instead and denying ourselves the chances to find those cures. of infrastructure investments where we're risking more bridges collapsing and all we're doi
, you don't care. >> i guess, but i don't. i don't care. >>> the pentagon chief for the f-35 warplane is slamming his partner lockheed martin. he's accusing them of trying to squeeze every nickel out of the u.s. government faults them for seeing the long-term benefits of the project. >>> and tesla ceo eland musk vowing to pay back an energy deficit loan in half the time required by the government. the company receives a doe loan in 2010 and made the first payment of nearly $13 million in december. >> by the way, did you see yesterday -- remember we had -- there was a big debate about the test drive of the tesla in "the new york times." >> yeah. uh-huh. >> and phil lebeau -- >> went well. then edmonds did one yesterday. >> how did that go? >> not so well. the whole interior screen that sort of is the hub of the whole car, it stopped working. >> i don't understand this debate anyway. if you want to go a long trip like that, wouldn't you take a different car? rent a car or -- >> yeah. phil made the point. this is what you do -- >> andrew made the point, too. >> if you feel green and you
Search Results 0 to 11 of about 12 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)